Mom Runs Burglars Off with Gun

[Dave-n-Oksana 49]

Yes really but beside the point unless you wish to argue technical minutia.

Let's discuss cause and effect shall we?

If you jump into the air you fall back down. Cause of falling back down, gravity. This is as true in Vermont as it is in Texas, or any other state, in fact is true everywhere, But the effect is not true in Vermont due to concealed carry. Cause and effect are linked scientifically by gravitational theory.

Fact is Vermont has a low crime rate. Fact is Vermont has concealed carry. Gary repeatedly links these two facts, yet there is in fact nothing to support his assertion. Other states have concealed carry yet don't share the low crime rate, thus we can conclude with scientific certainty Gary's theory is merely wishful thinking and demonstrably flawed.

You should really get your facts straight before spewing BS. According the FBI, violent crimes in states with very strict gun control laws, actually have higher violent crime per capita than the national average. Coincidence? I don't think so.

True the actual numbers may be less because of less population, but looking at the per capita numbers will give a better understanding of the truth.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You should really get your facts straight before spewing BS. According the FBI, violent crimes in states with very strict gun control laws, actually have higher violent crime per capita than the national average. Coincidence? I don't think so.

True the actual numbers may be less because of less population, but looking at the per capita numbers will give a better understanding of the truth.

He also conveniently overlooks the fact that Vermont is the ONLY state that has never required a license or permit for concealed carry and does not restrict concealed carry to residents. Or to licensed residents of other states.

How convenient.

He also does not suggest what might be the reason for our low crime if it is not that we can all defend ourselves

Edited February 10, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You assume a cause and effect. Vermont is not unique in it's gun laws, so why don't all states with similar gun laws share Vermonts results in terms of lower crime rates? Hint: Because your assumption is baseless.

Vermont IS unique. It is the ONLY state that allows ANY person to carry concealed without a license or permit, always has done so, and does not restict the carrying of arms to residents only. THAT is why our crime rate is lower than state with concealed carry but only for those that bother to get a license. You can;t even get the facts of the law right. And THAT is what you base your argument on? Erroneous information?

Concealed carry has reduced crime in every state that has implemented it. The more lenient the restrictions the greater the reduction in crime (FBI Uniform Crime Report) The longer states have concealed carry in effect, the more their crime is reduced. (FBI Uniform Crime Report) Vermont has NEVER restricted the carrying of concealed firearms so it has the longest period of allowing concealed carry of any state. Vermont has the MOST lenient laws for the longest period of time and the lowest crime. In fact Vermont follows the pattern of cause and effect perfectly.

Now what do you say?

Besides, you continually concede that we do have the lowest crime rate and we do allow concealed carry for anyone but "that doesn't prove anything" Those ARE the facts, what else do you need?

You also continually refuse to even suggest another possible cause. If I am wrong, you will show me why. Denying facts in evidence doesn't cut it.

Lets see your explanation of why we are unique, since our unique gun law is not the reason.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I generally agree with you but Vermont is the only state that allows it without a permit. Does this in and of itself make a difference?

I don't know, there isn't enough data.

Oops, I guess he didn't know that. Does it change his argument?

One state that allows it has the lowest crime. Not enough data. 40 others allow itwith permits and all expereinced reductions in crime. Not enough data? The crime reductions continued and increased the longer the laws were in effect. Not enough data? The states with the most lenient laws have the greatest reduction in the crime rate. STILL not enough?

Then tell us please, Ready4One, WHAT IS THE REASON for our low crime?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Oops, I guess he didn't know that. Does it change his argument?

One state that allows it has the lowest crime. Not enough data. 40 others allow itwith permits and all expereinced reductions in crime. Not enough data? The crime reductions continued and increased the longer the laws were in effect. Not enough data? The states with the most lenient laws have the greatest reduction in the crime rate. STILL not enough?

Then tell us please, Ready4One, WHAT IS THE REASON for our low crime?

For me its hard to tell because crime is falling everywhere. I say allow it in oakland and watch the stats there very closely.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

For me its hard to tell because crime is falling everywhere. I say allow it in oakland and watch the stats there very closely.

One thing to look at Sousuke is the rate that crime falls in crimes related to firearms. This is the interesting part of the study done by John Lott.

Crime has been decreasing nationwide, of course nationwide we have gone from 5 states allowing concealed carry to 49 states allowing concealed carry since 1986. I can easily contend the reason for the overall drop is concealed carry nationwide. Also the 32% increase in gun ownership in the last 20 years, the removal of the Brady Act, the removal of the assault weapons ban...ALL have contributed to the reduced crime rate.

The key is when we look at stats for the rate of crimes not involving firearms...larceny, theft, auto theft, crimes that do not involve firearms or self defense and we see that the rates have increased or decreased much less. Also closely look at the crime rates of the states that have highly restrictive concealed carry, like California, or better, Illinois, the ONLY state with NO concealed carry. Interesting.

Google "John Lott" and read his studies. Fascinating.

I am sure it would reduce crime in Oakland, there is no reason it would not. However if Oaklands crime rate fell dramatically do you think that the Chief of Police would be happy with the budget cuts that would come his way?

Ready4One is simply wrong, does not like the facts so tries to deny them, offering none of his own. The good news is that this type of nonsense is finally passe, more state have concealed carry, more are making their carry laws more liberal, and the crime rate is decreasing.

The best news is that when a woman does what the one in the OP did, it stops not just THAT burglary or home invasion, but many others. Because of her actions MANY others will not even occur and the rate of crime will reduce even further.

Edited February 11, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[ready4ONE 5,400]

What I am saying Gary is there is no evidence beyond circumstantial to your claim. Plain and simple. You have made it very clear you ignore anything on any topic which goes against whatever your personal beliefs are on said topic. You have stated so proudly and repeatedly on this and other topics.

I didn't say Vermonts gun laws were not a factor, I said your claim they are the sole factor is just pompous bloviation.

[Dan and Judy 614]

No. Less live in Wyoming but they have higher crime rate.

Demographics seem pretty similar in Wyoming and Vermont. It seems that the rate of abortions is about 10 times higher in Vermont.

Perhaps the future burglers are being taken out pre emptively.

Of course there are states that have higher crime rates and higher abortion rates but their demographics don't match up so nicely

with Vermont.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The best news is that when a woman does what the one in the OP did, it stops not just THAT burglary or home invasion, but many others. Because of her actions MANY others will not even occur and the rate of crime will reduce even further.

and that the tiny .22 can be used defensively!

[Leatherneck 693]

and that the tiny .22 can be used defensively!

It worked for her.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

He also conveniently overlooks the fact that Vermont is the ONLY state that has never required a license or permit for concealed carry and does not restrict concealed carry to residents. Or to licensed residents of other states.

How convenient.

He also does not suggest what might be the reason for our low crime if it is not that we can all defend ourselves

We don't have concealed carry up here. We can pack our loaded guns and conceal them or pack them openly. No gun laws here in this Alaskas.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I didn't say Vermonts gun laws were not a factor, I said your claim they are the sole factor is just pompous bloviation.

Google John Lott. Read his studies, very complete and exhaustive, or remain ignorant of the facts, makes no difference to me.

You repeat over and over that they are not the sole reason. You STILL have not suggested even ONE other possible reason that Vermont's crime rate is so low, EXCEPT the ability to carry concealed for ANY person which you agree is a "factor".

PLEASE. List ONE other. ONE.

Just one.

Demographics seem pretty similar in Wyoming and Vermont. It seems that the rate of abortions is about 10 times higher in Vermont.

Perhaps the future burglers are being taken out pre emptively.

Of course there are states that have higher crime rates and higher abortion rates but their demographics don't match up so nicely

with Vermont.

Your brilliant contribution is appreciated. I will let your argument stand on its own...merits.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

and that the tiny .22 can be used defensively!

Of course it can! ANY criminal would rather have unarmed victims. ANY criminal would rather NOT be shot by a .22. They are perfectly capable of killing a person instantly and at best it hurts like HELL and requires a hospital visit which will likely result in an arrest and imprisonment. I actually prefer a .22 over a .25 ACP any day, not only because the ammo is better, more relaible, actually more powerful (slightly), cheaper, and the guns are invariably better quality (there were some good .25s made years ago though) In fact it is about as good as a .32 acp for that matter, except for some of the newer .32 loadings. The .25 and .32 are both of a bastardized semi-rimmed configuration conjured up by some long lost genius and cartridges of this type are very prone to feeding failures in semi-autos for which they are chambered. Headspacing on the mouth of the cartridge was once considered not viable (it is) and developers designed this semi-rimmed monstrosity to solve a problem that did not exist.n

Never apologize for being armed with a good .22 Anyone shot with one will quickly lose interest in your wallet, rape, assault or burglary.

Edited February 11, 2012 by Gary and Alla

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You should really get your facts straight before spewing BS. According the FBI, violent crimes in states with very strict gun control laws, actually have higher violent crime per capita than the national average. Coincidence? I don't think so.

True the actual numbers may be less because of less population, but looking at the per capita numbers will give a better understanding of the truth.

Dave, are you still doing your project? I have kind of kept this going for your benefit. We have here a classic anti-gun "non argument" The one where they say that "we" are wrong but offer no reasons for them being right. It is a simple denial of facts which is common on the anti-gun side. Simply throw out the "You're wrong!" accusation and that should be enough. If we persist they will say that WE ignore other facts but offer no facts. We are to believe that the crime rate is reduced by some magical unnamed factors. One proponent of this, when pressured here on VJ to give me a reason, said it was because of "Invisible unicorns" No kidding. Another says it is related to abortion rates. I NEVER challenge such arguments. Still trying to figure out if it is a lack of, or an abundance of, invisibale unicorns that keep us safe.

Another tactic is the fabrication of "data" They will ignore the FBI Uniform crime report used by every law enforcement agency as the measure of crime trends, and substitute somthing from the "Violence Policy Center" for example which does not consider a firearm to be useful in preventing crime UNLESS someone is shot or killed in self defense. This eliminates 90+% of all defensive firearms use (such as in the original article here) PLUS eliminates the deterent factor of people being armed in society.

You could probably print some of this for your study. Hope it helps.

[SuperDuper! 230]

Google John Lott. Read his studies, very complete and exhaustive, or remain ignorant of the facts, makes no difference to me.

You repeat over and over that they are not the sole reason. You STILL have not suggested even ONE other possible reason that Vermont's crime rate is so low, EXCEPT the ability to carry concealed for ANY person which you agree is a "factor".

PLEASE. List ONE other. ONE.

Gary, you are dead on in your thinking here. States with the most liberal carry laws have the lower crime rates. Cities with the strictest CCW carry laws have the highest crime/murder rates. They dont call it "Killadelphia" for nothing! Cities are flooded with illegal handguns, and when the armed crooks know that average Joe Whitey is not armed, well there's blood in the streets.